Compare countries

Two or three countries, side by side, one row per question. Pick up to 3.

Countries

LatviaChecked 18 August 2026

Depends on your industryWork: HighEnforcement: Active

In one paragraph: Latvia follows European Union privacy rules, so personal data may leave the country once the right paperwork is in place. But Latvia adds its own walls. Accounting records may not be stored outside the European Union at all. Phone and internet companies must hold call records for eighteen months. Banks need the central bank's blessing before handing systems to an outside supplier.
The catch: The relaxed European headline stops being true the moment you touch four things. (1) Accounting records: paper must stay in Latvia and electronic copies must stay inside the European Union, so a United States accounting or resource-planning cloud is unlawful for a Latvian company. (2) Telecoms: eighteen months of call and connection records, plus a gag on telling the customer. (3) Banking: significant outsourcing needs a filing with the central bank and a thirty-working-day wait. (4) State critical computer systems: the supplier and its owners must be from a NATO, European Union, European Free Trade Association or NATO Indo-Pacific partner country, and audit information may only be handled inside that same group of countries.
Does this apply to me?: Yes. A company with no office in Latvia is still caught if it offers goods or services to people in Latvia or watches what they do online. That reach comes from the European Union privacy regulation, which applies directly in Latvia. There is no size or revenue threshold to duck under. A company based outside Europe normally has to name a contact person inside the European Union. Latvia's own privacy act adds national detail rather than a separate territorial test.High confidence
Can the data leave the country?: Personal data can leave Latvia, but the answer flips depending on what kind of data it is. For ordinary personal data the European rules apply: send it anywhere with the right legal instrument. For accounting records the door is shut at the edge of the European Union — paper stays in Latvia, electronic files stay inside the European Union. Phone and internet companies must keep eighteen months of call records. Banks must clear big outsourcing deals with the central bank first. State critical computer systems can only be supplied and audited from allied countries.High confidence
What do I have to do to send it abroad?: For personal data the model is a permission list, not a ban list. You may send data to a country the European Commission has approved, or use the European Union's standard contract template, or use approved group-wide rules. The approved list is real and long — it includes the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and, for self-certified companies only, the United States. For accounting records none of this helps: the wall is geographic, and no contract unlocks it.High confidence
Who enforces this — and are they actually working?: The privacy regulator is the State Data Inspectorate, and it is genuinely working, not a name on a door. In 2025 it took 1,034 complaints, ran 1,396 checks, applied corrective measures 62 times and issued fines totalling 326,400 euros (about $355,000), the largest single fine being 300,000 euros (about $327,000). It has about 32 staff. In the first half of 2026 it received 832 complaints and opened 73 checks of its own motion. Separate regulators handle banking, telecoms and cyber security, and all are staffed.High confidence
How long must I keep it, and when must I delete it?: Latvia has an unusually crowded set of minimum keeping periods and one surprising maximum. You must keep accounting registers ten years and supporting documents at least five. Phone and internet companies must keep call records eighteen months. Medical records run from one year to forty years depending on the form. In the other direction, security audit trails must normally be deleted after one year — shorter than many global logging policies allow.High confidence
What happens when something goes wrong?: Count at least two clocks, and often three. If personal data is exposed you have 72 hours to tell the State Data Inspectorate, and you must tell affected people without delay if the risk to them is high. If you run an essential or important service you also have 24 hours to send an early warning to the cyber incident response body, then 72 hours for a first report — and trust service providers get only 24 hours for that first report too. Banks have a third set of reporting duties under European financial rules.High confidence
What's the trap?: Five things that are not in the summary. One: a child can consent from age 13, not 16, so a Latvian teenager can sign up without a parent. Two: mishandling personal data can be a crime, not just a fine, and a company's responsible employee faces up to four years in prison. Three: your accounting system cannot sit outside the European Union, and its entries must be made in Latvian. Four: audit logs must usually be deleted after one year. Five: a bank cannot move systems to a new supplier until it has filed with the central bank and waited thirty working days.High confidence
What's about to change?: Two dated items and three switches. On 12 January 2027 the European Data Act bans cloud providers from charging customers to move their data out — a real change to cloud contracts used in Latvia. On 14 October 2026 Latvia holds its next data protection specialist qualification examination. The switches: the government may still write binding rules on where computer systems are hosted and has not done so; the European Union's approval of United States data transfers is under formal challenge; and the cyber security law is being amended piece by piece.Medium confidence
Hardest industry wall: All industries — Grāmatvedības likums
Government — Ministru kabineta noteikumi Nr. 397 "Minimālās kiberdrošības prasības"

Hong Kong SARChecked 18 August 2026

Depends on your industryWork: MediumEnforcement: Active

In one paragraph: Hong Kong's privacy law contains a cross-border transfer ban that has never been switched on. It was written in 1995 and, thirty years later, still has no start date. So under the general law you can send personal data anywhere with no paperwork at all. The privacy regulator is busy and prosecutes people, but it cannot fine you directly.
The catch: The free-for-all stops at three doors. Licensed securities and futures firms need written permission from the markets regulator before their records live only on servers outside Hong Kong. Government departments are told not to put sensitive or personal information on public cloud at all. And data coming the other way, from mainland China into Hong Kong, is tightly controlled by mainland law, not by Hong Kong law - that is the wall most companies actually hit.
Does this apply to me?: Yes, it can reach you with no office in Hong Kong. The privacy law bites on whoever controls the collection, holding, use or processing of personal data in or from Hong Kong, so a foreign company running a Hong Kong-facing service is caught. There is no revenue or headcount threshold to fall below, no register to join, and no requirement to appoint a local representative. The anti-doxxing powers go further still: the regulator can order an overseas platform to take material down.High confidence
Can the data leave the country?: Under the general privacy law, yes - freely, with nothing to sign. The one section that would have restricted transfers abroad was written into the law in 1995 and has never been brought into operation, so today there is no legal control on personal data leaving Hong Kong. Industry rules are where the real limits sit, and there are fewer of them than people expect: the securities regulator is the main one, and government departments have their own restriction.High confidence
What do I have to do to send it abroad?: Nothing. There is no approval to seek, no standard contract to sign and no government list to check before personal data leaves Hong Kong. The model on paper is an allowlist - the regulator would publish a list of approved destinations - but because the section was never switched on, that list has never been issued and is empty. The regulator does publish a voluntary guide and encourages firms to build the safeguards now, but that is advice, not law.High confidence
Who enforces this — and are they actually working?: The Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, and it is genuinely busy. By the end of December 2025 it had issued 2,104 orders to 57 online platforms to take down 33,743 doxxing messages, opened 519 criminal investigations and arrested 81 people. But there is a catch that changes the risk picture completely: the Commissioner cannot impose a fine for breaking the privacy principles. It serves a notice telling you to fix the problem, and only ignoring that notice is a crime.High confidence
How long must I keep it, and when must I delete it?: There is a hard ceiling and almost no floor in the privacy law itself. You must erase personal data once it is no longer needed for the purpose you collected it for, and failing to do so is a criminal offence carrying a fine of up to HK$10,000 (about $1,300). The privacy law sets no minimum keeping periods; those come from tax, company and anti-money-laundering law instead. Where the two pull against each other, the specific keeping duty in the other law wins, and you delete once it expires.Medium confidence
What happens when something goes wrong?: For a normal data breach there is no deadline, because there is no duty. Telling the Privacy Commissioner about a breach is voluntary in Hong Kong - the regulator asks you to do it as good practice and gives you a form, but no law compels it. That is unusual and it is changing: since 1 January 2026 operators of designated critical infrastructure must report computer-system security incidents, so those firms now have a real clock while everyone else has none.High confidence
What's the trap?: Five things that catch people out. First, marketing mistakes are crimes here, not fines - using someone's data for direct marketing without the right consent can mean five years in prison. Second, the regulator cannot fine you, so people assume the risk is low and miss the criminal exposure entirely. Third, Hong Kong sets no age at which a child can consent, so there is no simple number to code into a sign-up flow. Fourth, licensed securities firms need written permission before their records live only on overseas servers, and two named people who live in Hong Kong must be able to unlock them. Fifth, the dormant transfer section, if ever switched on, would also catch data moving between two foreign countries when a Hong Kong company controls it.Medium confidence
What's about to change?: Nothing is scheduled to land in the next twelve months that we could confirm. The critical infrastructure security law already started on 1 January 2026, and the government's guideline for generative artificial intelligence was revised in December 2025. The thing to watch is not a new bill. It is a switch the government has held for thirty years: the cross-border transfer section can be brought into force by a simple commencement notice, with no consultation and no new vote.Medium confidence
Hardest industry wall: None found.

The eight framework questions answered for each selected country
Question	LatviaChecked 18 August 2026	Hong Kong SARChecked 18 August 2026
The three ratings	Depends on your industry Work: High Enforcement: Active	Depends on your industry Work: Medium Enforcement: Active
In one paragraph	Latvia follows European Union privacy rules, so personal data may leave the country once the right paperwork is in place. But Latvia adds its own walls. Accounting records may not be stored outside the European Union at all. Phone and internet companies must hold call records for eighteen months. Banks need the central bank's blessing before handing systems to an outside supplier.	Hong Kong's privacy law contains a cross-border transfer ban that has never been switched on. It was written in 1995 and, thirty years later, still has no start date. So under the general law you can send personal data anywhere with no paperwork at all. The privacy regulator is busy and prosecutes people, but it cannot fine you directly.
The catch	The relaxed European headline stops being true the moment you touch four things. (1) Accounting records: paper must stay in Latvia and electronic copies must stay inside the European Union, so a United States accounting or resource-planning cloud is unlawful for a Latvian company. (2) Telecoms: eighteen months of call and connection records, plus a gag on telling the customer. (3) Banking: significant outsourcing needs a filing with the central bank and a thirty-working-day wait. (4) State critical computer systems: the supplier and its owners must be from a NATO, European Union, European Free Trade Association or NATO Indo-Pacific partner country, and audit information may only be handled inside that same group of countries.	The free-for-all stops at three doors. Licensed securities and futures firms need written permission from the markets regulator before their records live only on servers outside Hong Kong. Government departments are told not to put sensitive or personal information on public cloud at all. And data coming the other way, from mainland China into Hong Kong, is tightly controlled by mainland law, not by Hong Kong law - that is the wall most companies actually hit.
Does this apply to me?	Yes. A company with no office in Latvia is still caught if it offers goods or services to people in Latvia or watches what they do online. That reach comes from the European Union privacy regulation, which applies directly in Latvia. There is no size or revenue threshold to duck under. A company based outside Europe normally has to name a contact person inside the European Union. Latvia's own privacy act adds national detail rather than a separate territorial test.High confidence	Yes, it can reach you with no office in Hong Kong. The privacy law bites on whoever controls the collection, holding, use or processing of personal data in or from Hong Kong, so a foreign company running a Hong Kong-facing service is caught. There is no revenue or headcount threshold to fall below, no register to join, and no requirement to appoint a local representative. The anti-doxxing powers go further still: the regulator can order an overseas platform to take material down.High confidence
Can the data leave the country?	Personal data can leave Latvia, but the answer flips depending on what kind of data it is. For ordinary personal data the European rules apply: send it anywhere with the right legal instrument. For accounting records the door is shut at the edge of the European Union — paper stays in Latvia, electronic files stay inside the European Union. Phone and internet companies must keep eighteen months of call records. Banks must clear big outsourcing deals with the central bank first. State critical computer systems can only be supplied and audited from allied countries.High confidence	Under the general privacy law, yes - freely, with nothing to sign. The one section that would have restricted transfers abroad was written into the law in 1995 and has never been brought into operation, so today there is no legal control on personal data leaving Hong Kong. Industry rules are where the real limits sit, and there are fewer of them than people expect: the securities regulator is the main one, and government departments have their own restriction.High confidence
What do I have to do to send it abroad?	For personal data the model is a permission list, not a ban list. You may send data to a country the European Commission has approved, or use the European Union's standard contract template, or use approved group-wide rules. The approved list is real and long — it includes the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and, for self-certified companies only, the United States. For accounting records none of this helps: the wall is geographic, and no contract unlocks it.High confidence	Nothing. There is no approval to seek, no standard contract to sign and no government list to check before personal data leaves Hong Kong. The model on paper is an allowlist - the regulator would publish a list of approved destinations - but because the section was never switched on, that list has never been issued and is empty. The regulator does publish a voluntary guide and encourages firms to build the safeguards now, but that is advice, not law.High confidence
Who enforces this — and are they actually working?	The privacy regulator is the State Data Inspectorate, and it is genuinely working, not a name on a door. In 2025 it took 1,034 complaints, ran 1,396 checks, applied corrective measures 62 times and issued fines totalling 326,400 euros (about $355,000), the largest single fine being 300,000 euros (about $327,000). It has about 32 staff. In the first half of 2026 it received 832 complaints and opened 73 checks of its own motion. Separate regulators handle banking, telecoms and cyber security, and all are staffed.High confidence	The Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, and it is genuinely busy. By the end of December 2025 it had issued 2,104 orders to 57 online platforms to take down 33,743 doxxing messages, opened 519 criminal investigations and arrested 81 people. But there is a catch that changes the risk picture completely: the Commissioner cannot impose a fine for breaking the privacy principles. It serves a notice telling you to fix the problem, and only ignoring that notice is a crime.High confidence
How long must I keep it, and when must I delete it?	Latvia has an unusually crowded set of minimum keeping periods and one surprising maximum. You must keep accounting registers ten years and supporting documents at least five. Phone and internet companies must keep call records eighteen months. Medical records run from one year to forty years depending on the form. In the other direction, security audit trails must normally be deleted after one year — shorter than many global logging policies allow.High confidence	There is a hard ceiling and almost no floor in the privacy law itself. You must erase personal data once it is no longer needed for the purpose you collected it for, and failing to do so is a criminal offence carrying a fine of up to HK$10,000 (about $1,300). The privacy law sets no minimum keeping periods; those come from tax, company and anti-money-laundering law instead. Where the two pull against each other, the specific keeping duty in the other law wins, and you delete once it expires.Medium confidence
What happens when something goes wrong?	Count at least two clocks, and often three. If personal data is exposed you have 72 hours to tell the State Data Inspectorate, and you must tell affected people without delay if the risk to them is high. If you run an essential or important service you also have 24 hours to send an early warning to the cyber incident response body, then 72 hours for a first report — and trust service providers get only 24 hours for that first report too. Banks have a third set of reporting duties under European financial rules.High confidence	For a normal data breach there is no deadline, because there is no duty. Telling the Privacy Commissioner about a breach is voluntary in Hong Kong - the regulator asks you to do it as good practice and gives you a form, but no law compels it. That is unusual and it is changing: since 1 January 2026 operators of designated critical infrastructure must report computer-system security incidents, so those firms now have a real clock while everyone else has none.High confidence
What's the trap?	Five things that are not in the summary. One: a child can consent from age 13, not 16, so a Latvian teenager can sign up without a parent. Two: mishandling personal data can be a crime, not just a fine, and a company's responsible employee faces up to four years in prison. Three: your accounting system cannot sit outside the European Union, and its entries must be made in Latvian. Four: audit logs must usually be deleted after one year. Five: a bank cannot move systems to a new supplier until it has filed with the central bank and waited thirty working days.High confidence	Five things that catch people out. First, marketing mistakes are crimes here, not fines - using someone's data for direct marketing without the right consent can mean five years in prison. Second, the regulator cannot fine you, so people assume the risk is low and miss the criminal exposure entirely. Third, Hong Kong sets no age at which a child can consent, so there is no simple number to code into a sign-up flow. Fourth, licensed securities firms need written permission before their records live only on overseas servers, and two named people who live in Hong Kong must be able to unlock them. Fifth, the dormant transfer section, if ever switched on, would also catch data moving between two foreign countries when a Hong Kong company controls it.Medium confidence
What's about to change?	Two dated items and three switches. On 12 January 2027 the European Data Act bans cloud providers from charging customers to move their data out — a real change to cloud contracts used in Latvia. On 14 October 2026 Latvia holds its next data protection specialist qualification examination. The switches: the government may still write binding rules on where computer systems are hosted and has not done so; the European Union's approval of United States data transfers is under formal challenge; and the cyber security law is being amended piece by piece.Medium confidence	Nothing is scheduled to land in the next twelve months that we could confirm. The critical infrastructure security law already started on 1 January 2026, and the government's guideline for generative artificial intelligence was revised in December 2025. The thing to watch is not a new bill. It is a switch the government has held for thirty years: the cross-border transfer section can be brought into force by a simple commencement notice, with no consultation and no new vote.Medium confidence
Hardest industry wall	All industries — Grāmatvedības likums Government — Ministru kabineta noteikumi Nr. 397 "Minimālās kiberdrošības prasības"	None found.